Tommy Robinson jailed

SnakePlissken

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Tommy and the EDL

You have a reputable source for that of course, one which states Tommy Robinson lended support to a child abuser after their conviction.

terryduff12

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

What is there to debate about?.

You don't like the term spastic. I suggest you suck it up.

Stephen Yaxley lennon is not a warrior for justice. His actions past and present are at the best often times mindlessly dumb.

Tommeh's spastics has a ring to it.

With a little bit of thought and a little bit of logic. No one could possibly be enamoured with the chap.
Hes done nothing. He will do nothing. Facebook likes are his game.

WinnyTheSpastic Used my logic on the one, nice ring to it too.
Don`t remember saying i either like or don't like the saying either.

WinnyThePoo

terryduff12 wrote: »

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

What is there to debate about?.

You don't like the term spastic. I suggest you suck it up.

Stephen Yaxley lennon is not a warrior for justice. His actions past and present are at the best often times mindlessly dumb.

Tommeh's spastics has a ring to it.

With a little bit of thought and a little bit of logic. No one could possibly be enamoured with the chap.
Hes done nothing. He will do nothing. Facebook likes are his game.

WinnyTheSpastic Used my logic on the one, nice ring to it too.
Don`t remember saying i either like or don't like the saying either.

That's amazing. The creativity that went into that. As usual thr wonders of life prevail.

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You have a reputable source for that of course, one which states Tommy Robinson lended support to a child abuser after their conviction.

Sure



https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/176587/Paedo-rap-for-EDL-leader

Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, backed the group’s founder member Richard Price, 41, after he was convicted of child porn charges.


After he was jailed for three months for threatening behaviour at the rally, the EDL launched a campaign to free him and Lennon claimed Price had been “stitched up”.


After a barrage of criticism from EDL members, Lennon later retracted the statement and said: “We completely condemn Richard Price.”

SnakePlissken

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Sure



https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/176587/Paedo-rap-for-EDL-leader

Very poorly written article, or dare I say, purposely written poorly to confuse those who use it as their only source.

No, Tommy Robinson did not support Richard Price after his conviction for possession of child porn, he supported him only after his arrest for affray at an EDL rally, once the evidence against Price was confirmed, long before his conviction, Tommy Robinson did indeed condemn his former associate. But don't let the facts get in the way of your continuous claim of Tommy Robinson being supportive of child abusers.

Billy86

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Very poorly written article, or dare I say, purposely written poorly to confuse those who use it as their only source.

No, Tommy Robinson did not support Richard Price after his conviction for possession of child porn, he supported him only after his arrest for affray at an EDL rally, once the evidence against Price was confirmed, long before his conviction, Tommy Robinson did indeed condemn his former associate. But don't let the facts get in the way of your continuous claim of Tommy Robinson being supportive of child abusers.

So you have a reputable source for that version of events?

super_furry

Billy86 wrote: »

So you have a reputable source for that version of events?

Red it on facebook mate.

SnakePlissken

Billy86 wrote: »

So you have a reputable source for that version of events?

A claim was made that Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser after their conviction of same, had he done so I'm sure a reputable source can be provided to substantiate this, an appallingly wriiten article in the revered online edition of The Daily Star isn't particularly trustworthy.

Billy86

SnakePlissken wrote: »

A claim was made that Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser after their conviction of same, had he done so I'm sure a reputable source can be provided to substantiate this.

So... no then, you don't have a source to counter that which was provided to you?

I mean it was you that was demanding a source to believe what you were being claimed. Now you're trying to claim that the source provided was wrong, so you'll need to provide a source to counter it or you don't really have a leg to stand on.

tiger55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwEP-TcujeU

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Very poorly written article, or dare I say, purposely written poorly to confuse those who use it as their only source.

No, Tommy Robinson did not support Richard Price after his conviction for possession of child porn, he supported him only after his arrest for affray at an EDL rally, once the evidence against Price was confirmed, long before his conviction, Tommy Robinson did indeed condemn his former associate. But don't let the facts get in the way of your continuous claim of Tommy Robinson being supportive of child abusers.

The opening line is.

Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, backed the group’s founder member Richard Price, 41, after he was convicted of child porn charges.

No ambiguity there. Has Tommy brought successful libel proceedings against this publication or have you another source for your claim?

Odhinn

tiger55 wrote: »

.................

A 'white nationalist'? Classy.

SnakePlissken

Billy86 wrote: »

I mean it was you that was demanding a source to believe what you were being claimed.

Almost as poorly written as the referenced article.

Captain Obvious stated Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser post conviction, I doubted this claim and asked for a source, what was provided was an article from the online edition of The Daily Star. It is your bias that allows you to accept this sole article as proof of Captain Obvious' statement, I'm much more discerning as to what sources I hold with any respect. Lord knows he has enough detractors, had he done what Captain Obvious has claimed I'm sure he can link to a Times or even, dare I say, a Guardian article as evidence... the online Daily Star? I'm going to have to pass.

Billy86

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Almost as poorly written as the referenced article.

Captain Obvious stated Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser post conviction, I doubted this claim and asked for a source, what was provided was an article from the online edition of The Daily Star. It is your bias that allows you to accept this sole article as proof of Captain Obvious' statement, I'm much more discerning as to what sources I hold with any respect. Lord knows he has enough detractors, had he done what Captain Obvious has claimed I'm sure he can link to a Times or even, dare I say, a Guardian article as evidence... the online Daily Star? I'm going to have to pass.

You're not denying that price had child porn, or that robinson defended him. But you are claiming these happened in a different order that changes everything, with nothing to back it up.

We both know Yaxley loves some litigation. Why didn't he press charges here? If it were false he would have. Yet he didn't as far as I can see.

Don't forget, you set the rule by asking for sources, if you can't provide sources of your own then you've no leg to stand on, as you're not even hitting the standard that you laid out to the other poster.

So in summary... you've got no source for your claim then?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

SnakePlissken wrote: »

A claim was made that Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser after their conviction of same, had he done so I'm sure a reputable source can be provided to substantiate this, an appallingly wriiten article in the revered online edition of The Daily Star isn't particularly trustworthy.

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Almost as poorly written as the referenced article.

Captain Obvious stated Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser post conviction, I doubted this claim and asked for a source, what was provided was an article from the online edition of The Daily Star. It is your bias that allows you to accept this sole article as proof of Captain Obvious' statement, I'm much more discerning as to what sources I hold with any respect. Lord knows he has enough detractors, had he done what Captain Obvious has claimed I'm sure he can link to a Times or even, dare I say, a Guardian article as evidence... the online Daily Star? I'm going to have to pass.

Ok - so from The Times, as you wish:

The far-right group launched a campaign to free Richard Price, an organiser for the EDL in the West Midlands, after he was jailed last month for violent behaviour. But Price, 41, had been convicted in June 2010 of making four indecent images of children, and possessing cocaine and crack cocaine.
Price, from Quinton, Birmingham, and Collum Keyes, 23, also from Birmingham, were among 12 people arrested when they surged through police lines during a protest in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, in May 2010.

When that case came to court in December, Price admitted using threatening behaviour. He was jailed for three months and given a ten-year Criminal Anti-Social Behaviour Order banning him from attending marches outside Birmingham. Keyes, who admitted disorderly conduct, was fined £150.

When Price was jailed, EDL members launched a campaign urging supporters to write to the Prime Minister and MPs to try to “win justice for Richard Price, EDL”.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/far-right-hero-is-a-convicted-paedophile-z6pb87rr2q5 (needs an account)

So, timeline:
May 2010 - Arrested at a protest in Aylesbury
June 2010 - Convicted of child porn offense
Dec 2010 - Jailed for three months as a result of the arrest in Aylesbury.

At this point, the EDL launch campaign to "win justice".

Conclusion: article makes no claim, but it's probable that they did know and at least should really have known.

(Unrelaed to link: it appears from other sources that they initially tried to claim that the police raid was unfair or uncalled for; and only condemned him after EDL members complained)

SnakePlissken

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/far-right-hero-is-a-convicted-paedophile-z6pb87rr2q5 (needs an account)

That indeed appears to be a credible source, I humbly stand corrected.

Dante7

SnakePlissken wrote: »

That indeed appears to be a credible source, I humbly stand corrected.

Although it does seem that Robinson was defending him against the disorder charge, as opposed to the other charges.

super_furry

Think it's always worth remembering that this subtle, understated and very tasteful artwork exists.

tiger55

Is it not obvious to people that Tommy works for the security services?

Odhinn

tiger55 wrote: »

Is it not obvious to people that Tommy works for the security services?

You mean like yer man the "white nationalist" thinks?

SnakePlissken

tiger55 wrote: »

Is it not obvious to people that Tommy works for the security services?

What's this now?

nacho libre

Dante7 wrote: »

Although it does seem that Robinson was defending him against the disorder charge, as opposed to the other charges.

Did Robinson know about the child porn charges at that stage? If he did, like most people would do, he should have disowned him there and then.

tiger55

SnakePlissken wrote: »

What's this now?

I suggest you check out some videos about this subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xypkwFhid00

tiger55

SnakePlissken wrote: »

What's this now?

tiger55

SnakePlissken wrote: »

What's this now?

Here is a video of Tommy being slapped by a Muslim hate preacher:eek:

This gives Tommy street cred and support.

They are BOTH in on it.

Think about it, how did some Muslim walking down the street just happen to spot Tommy Robinson in a car? (and vice versa).

You dont look at people who are driving cars down the street lol

Maybe if it is a mate who recognises you or your car then its plausible, i have had a toot of a car horn from mates etc

This is a staged event. Just like a number of click bait youtube videos we see, but this is very sophisticated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMW032VThuQ

Billy86

Thank you tiger, for bringing both Tommy supporters and critics together in a complete state of befuddlement.

John Sacrimoni

Altogether now, OH TOMMY TOMMY...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

nacho libre wrote: »

Did Robinson know about the child porn charges at that stage? If he did, like most people would do, he should have disowned him there and then.

Inconclusive, but more than likely.

They were certainly supporting him six months after his conviction.

You'd have to wonder how, given his in-depth knowledge of other child abuse cases, he could have missed one in his own back yard.

There's also the claims that they called the initial raid on Price's home 'uncalled for' and that he was being 'stitched up'.

Auguste Comte

Check out @PeoplesMomentum’;s Tweet:

https://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/1069600789809831936?s=09

Blazedup

tiger55 wrote: »

https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/r-v-stephen-yaxley-lennon-aka-tommy-robinson/

Robocop Corcoran

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He is only out on bail. He will be back inside after his retrial.

Really? When is the retrial?

ricero

I saw today online that bbc panorama tried to do a stitch up job on Tommy for a new investigation documentary but Tommy had his own secret camera men and will reveal the truth outside bbc Manchester later this month. John Sweeney and some of the producers seem very worried in a video clip I saw of Tommy revealing his hidden video clips.

It's disgusting the fake news culture which is now embedded in established media. Love or hate Tommy it's scary to see this.

Auguste Comte

Any chance of a link?

ricero wrote: »

I saw today online that bbc panorama tried to do a stitch up job on Tommy for a new investigation documentary but Tommy had his own secret camera men and will reveal the truth outside bbc Manchester later this month. John Sweeney and some of the producers seem very worried in a video clip I saw of Tommy revealing his hidden video clips.

It's disgusting the fake news culture which is now embedded in established media. Love or hate Tommy it's scary to see this.

ricero

Cant link on my phone but saw it on twitter and Robinsons facebook page.

Robert Wolfe

I have a lot of respect for him.

TomSweeney

seamus

My bullsh1t detector is beeping.

If he had anything concrete he wouldn't be rambling nonsensically into the camera and planning a big "reveal" in two weeks. This is nothing more than a stunt.

You can see by the comments that what he has is fairly irrelevant, his supporters already believe him. And given the number of obvious conspiracy theorists, then they won't need to see any evidence to be convinced of what he has said.

Complete con man and scumbag.

professore

seamus wrote: »

My bullsh1t detector is beeping.

If he had anything concrete he wouldn't be rambling nonsensically into the camera and planning a big "reveal" in two weeks. This is nothing more than a stunt.

You can see by the comments that what he has is fairly irrelevant, his supporters already believe him. And given the number of obvious conspiracy theorists, then they won't need to see any evidence to be convinced of what he has said.

Complete con man and scumbag.

If he was just an out and out racist, then I'd agree. However he doesn't have any issue with people of other races as far as I can see. He only has issue with Muslim extremists.

Even if he never did anything good in his life other than highlight the plight of working class girls being systematically groomed and raped by Pakistani grooming gangs when no one else would listen, he has done the world a service.

So personally I would hold off on the judgement for now.

Muckka

He's definitely not a racist, he has supporter's from people who are from all different ethnic backgrounds,and colours.

A racist is someone who thinks their race is better than any other race.

It has nothing to do with religion, he's just letting the world know about Salafist and Wahabbism how they're he'll bent on our destruction.

The left and their social justice warriors decided to call everyone's who isn't Left or a social justice warrior a racist.

I think every social justice warrior should get a good fong up the hole and stop stirring s h i t

Does that mean I'm racist ?

No it doesn't.

It just means I can't stand social justice warriors.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

professore wrote: »

If he was just an out and out racist, then I'd agree. However he doesn't have any issue with people of other races as far as I can see. He only has issue with Muslim extremists.

Even if he never did anything good in his life other than highlight the plight of working class girls being systematically groomed and raped by Pakistani grooming gangs when no one else would listen, he has done the world a service.

So personally I would hold off on the judgement for now.

Correction number one - You don't have to hate all other races in order to be racist. You can be racist against specific races.

Correction number two - he has issues with muslims full stop - not just extremists. He famously blamed ALL muslims for the 7/7 bombings.

professore

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Correction number one - You don't have to hate all other races in order to be racist. You can be racist agaisnt specific races.

That's irrelevant to what I said.

Correction number two - he has issues with muslims full stop - not just exptremists.

Really?

It's like saying anyone highlighting abuse in the Catholic Church hates all Catholics ....

Billy86

Robert Wolfe wrote: »

I have a lot of respect for him.

Why would you have a lot of respect for a defender of pedophiles, who (along with a pedophile) established a group that has turned out to be absolutely riddled with them?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

professore wrote: »

That's irrelevant to what I said.

Not given the first sentence.

Really?

Yes, really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j7IX_5a_9M

Regardess of whether you like him or not, or whether he has a point or not, that is racist towards muslims.

Odhinn

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Correction number one - You don't have to hate all other races in order to be racist. You can be racist against specific races.

Correction number two - he has issues with muslims full stop - not just extremists. He famously blamed ALL muslims for the 7/7 bombings.

Indeed

Every single Muslim watching this... on 7/7 you got away with killing and maiming British citizens... you had better understand that we have built a network from one end of the country to the other end... and the Islamic community will feel the full force of the English Defence League if we see any of our British citizens killed, maimed, or hurt on British soil ever again.

Muckka

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Not given the first sentence.



Yes, really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j7IX_5a_9M

Regardess of whether you like him or not, or whether he has a point or not, that is racist towards muslims.

With respect, Muslims are not a race.

They're a religion with different sects, I admire the Sufi Muslims and the Shia and Allawites aren't too bad.

But the Sunni wahabbism and salafist are dangerous I don't like their idealism.

Odhinn

Muckka wrote: »

With respect, Muslims are not a race.

.............

The correct term is islamophobic, and that he most certainly is.

professore

Odhinn wrote: »

Every single Muslim watching this... on 7/7 you got away with killing and maiming British citizens... you had better understand that we have built a network from one end of the country to the other end... and the Islamic community will feel the full force of the English Defence League if we see any of our British citizens killed, maimed, or hurt on British soil ever again.

I don't see how this implies violence against Muslims. It implies protesting in the strongest possible fashion to the leaders of those communities. If he said "we will exact revenge on those communities" then fair enough. I have heard worse in the recent abortion debates here from both sides.

Problem is the people in the UK who are supposed to keep law and order have a hands off approach to Islamic extremists. So it's no surprise groups like this form. Also why he very quickly left the BNP as a teenager when he realised they only admitted white English people.

I'm not saying he potentially ISN'T a racist ... just that the evidence isn't there, and he's not trying to run for election or anything. He's had huge personal cost from this.

Odhinn

professore wrote: »

I don't see how this implies violence against Muslims. I..............

Then I suggest glasses and a course in reading comprehension.

Odhinn

professore wrote: »

I don't see how this implies violence against Muslims. It implies protesting in the strongest possible fashion to the leaders of those communities. If he said "we will exact revenge on those communities" then fair enough. I have heard worse in the recent abortion debates here from both sides.

Problem is the people in the UK who are supposed to keep law and order have a hands off approach to Islamic extremists. So it's no surprise groups like this form. Also why he very quickly left the BNP as a teenager when he realised they only admitted white English people.

I'm not saying he potentially ISN'T a racist ... just that the evidence isn't there, and he's not trying to run for election or anything. He's had huge personal cost from this.

He didn't know the BNP were racist and it took him a year to cop on to it? Seriously.

FTA69

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=393733637839882&id=166732810539967

Have a look at this video and tell me he’s not racist.

“She’s so ugly a Syrian refugee wouldn’t rape her”

“The people from Somalia are backward savages”

The guy is a f*cking cretin.